Westeros monthly 6p FFA
Moderator: Forum Moderators
I may be willing to reconsider my postition on this map. I'd be willing to give it another chance if there were SET diplomacy breaks...perhaps every 10 turns going to the lobby where /msg is possible. Also, starting with a 3 hex keep seems to put a burden vs. those who have a 4 hex keep as those initial recruits are so vital.
Anyway, I won't steal anyone's slot, but if someone bails i may be around to pick up the pieces.
Anyway, I won't steal anyone's slot, but if someone bails i may be around to pick up the pieces.
-
- Inactive Developer
- Posts: 521
- Joined: October 27th, 2005, 5:30 am
- Location: St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, Earth
I think (well I'm not Zoo, so I'd have to guess before I code it) that it would be quite easy to fix this with WML and some shroud tricks.jb wrote:I may be willing to reconsider my postition on this map. I'd be willing to give it another chance if there were SET diplomacy breaks...perhaps every 10 turns going to the lobby where /msg is possible.
I'm thinking two channels of communication:
1. create a small area 12 hexes into solid cavewall where one unit with unlimited movement (from now on referred to as the messenger) and 6 hotspots are located.
Each turn the messenger changes side to the current players side. The six hotspots represent each available side (preferably the player name as label - with color) and when the messenger moves on the hotspot of one side the messenger (and thus the current player) get on the same team as the hotspot owner.
The first thing that happens on every player turn is that the messenger unit gets on a neutral team so that it's not possible to see who the previous player has been talking to.
2. Create 20 2x2 or 3x3 grassland holes in solid cavewall. In each hole put one unit from two sides with movement=1, this way all players will be able to communicate all the time through labeling.
If you'd like I could try to code this as a way to improve my WML-skills.
/tsr - that doesn't now if it's even wanted by the official Westeros GM
-
- Inactive Developer
- Posts: 521
- Joined: October 27th, 2005, 5:30 am
- Location: St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, Earth
TSR-
sounds like a decent idea although I am worried by how much it could slow play. You could definitely try jsut to see how it works. A timer would really really be required, as I foten notice fairly quick players can take for absolute ever (like 15mins a side) in a serious 2v2 or 3v3 as they hash things out.
sounds like a decent idea although I am worried by how much it could slow play. You could definitely try jsut to see how it works. A timer would really really be required, as I foten notice fairly quick players can take for absolute ever (like 15mins a side) in a serious 2v2 or 3v3 as they hash things out.
There are three roads to ruin: by gambling, which is the quickest; through women, which is the most pleasurable; and through taking the advice of experts, which is the most certain. -de Gaulle
-
- Posts: 35
- Joined: August 25th, 2006, 6:52 pm
I don't consider myself to have any reasonable skill at wesnoth, however the idea really interests me. Could you also try to set up several more for less experienced players?
I'm also attempting to make a similar map from scratch for a few of my buddies, do you have any guidelines for making a good map?
I'm also attempting to make a similar map from scratch for a few of my buddies, do you have any guidelines for making a good map?
BTW, has tsr's messenger idea been tried?
It could be done so that communication is only possible while it's not the player's turn. Preferrably, you could also block communication from other players to prevent them from listening in to your alliance plans.
Also, is there an interest in Borderland-Wars type victory conditions for this? Meaning you win by conquering capitals instead of killing the leaders?
It could be done so that communication is only possible while it's not the player's turn. Preferrably, you could also block communication from other players to prevent them from listening in to your alliance plans.
Also, is there an interest in Borderland-Wars type victory conditions for this? Meaning you win by conquering capitals instead of killing the leaders?
Try some Multiplayer Scenarios / Campaigns
I think schedualing this will be nightmarish...
Though even with that it sounds fun. If you don't get enough players I'd be interested in joining.
Definatly post a replay after it is finished
I think that it might be easier to do a 4p wilderlands though...
It might be neat if each player played a diffrent faction.
Though even with that it sounds fun. If you don't get enough players I'd be interested in joining.
Definatly post a replay after it is finished
I think that it might be easier to do a 4p wilderlands though...
It might be neat if each player played a diffrent faction.
"There are two kinds of old men in the world. The kind who didn't go to war and who say that they should have lived fast died young and left a handsome corpse and the old men who did go to war and who say that there is no such thing as a handsome corpse."
Seconded. I'd like to try this kind of game too, but I fear that I would only be a source of cheap villages and exp to experienced players who started near me, which would unbalance the game between the real contenders based only on who was lucky enough to start next to the guy who doesn't know what he's doing.jgp93 wrote:I don't consider myself to have any reasonable skill at wesnoth, however the idea really interests me. Could you also try to set up several more for less experienced players?
Try looking at the original posting dates; this project looked promising, but died (I believe the tournament that was running at the time was partially responable). If Bece wants to bring it back, I might even play.
And to Velensk, I believe Bece posted the replay a long time ago, but didn't finish it. Yes, he did win, thanks to an elicit concoction of lying, deceit, alliances, backstabbing, and blatant propaganda. Oh, and his play was somewhat competent as well.
And to Velensk, I believe Bece posted the replay a long time ago, but didn't finish it. Yes, he did win, thanks to an elicit concoction of lying, deceit, alliances, backstabbing, and blatant propaganda. Oh, and his play was somewhat competent as well.